The Magic of Seals
Every phenomenon of nature, every Current of Power, takes shape as the result of a certain potential difference — that is, as the process by which the poles of some binary mutually attract.
Western Magic traditionally calls the positive pole of such a binary an “Angel,” and the negative pole a “Demon.” In every phenomenon and every object of the manifested world, one can find its own “Angel” — the expansive component, the source of the manifestation of Power — and its own “Demon” — the attractive component, the cause of the movement of energy.
We have discussed that magical interference in the energy flow of any binary can occur either as theurgic interaction with an Angel, or as goetic interaction with a Demon.
Any such interaction requires the release of a certain amount of energy, because the nature of attention demands a flow of energy. To enter into interaction with an “angel” or a “demon” — that is, a ministering spirit— you must release part of the energy that this spirit normally spends on its ordinary affairs. A ministering spirit usually expends all its available resources on carrying out its direct work and has no free channels through which one could contact it.
The most effective way to achieve this release, or this buying out of energy, is to use the Seal or Sigil of the corresponding spirit.
A Seal is built as a sign of Power. (In the Myth under consideration, a Seal is a tamed Sigil— a Sigil to which a controlling will has been applied.) The Seal buys out a portion of energy from the world system of interactions and thereby opens the possibility of applying the operator’s will to the vortex of the ministering spirit.
Seals act because they serve as psychocosmic analogues of macrocosmic powers — Spirits.
Just as the Names of the Most High used in Magic and religion are psychocosmic reflections of primordial Creative influxes, Seals are creative acts that belong to the operator’s individual will.
When a Magus creates or uses a Seal, he asserts the authority of his will over the Sigil in the Psychocosmos and therefore, by the law of Analogies, over the corresponding vortex in the Macrocosmos. The Magus then gains the capacity to act creatively upon the energy flow in the corresponding binary and therefore to bring reality into conformity with his will.
Like any graphic object, a Seal’s design contains many nuances. Alterations in these nuances allow one, to a greater or lesser degree, to change the character of the Seal’s final effect. To use a Seal as effectively as possible, you must first understand the meaning of its elements with maximum clarity and then find the proportion among these elements that brings the Seal’s Power into the closest possible correspondence with the individual traits of the operator’s Power.
In this respect, the Magic of Seals closely resembles one branch of Galdr— the art of binding Runes and creating Galdrastaves from them. These are different expressions of the same understanding, developed in the Middle East and in Northern Europe. They differ only in the set of elements they use: most Sigils are constructed on the basis of proto-Phoenician “Enochian” symbols, while Galdrastaves rest on a Runic foundation.
In any case, the successful use of graphic Sickles that release the energy required for Ritual demands that the Magus clearly understand both the nature of how this Sickle acts and the nature of its individual elements. Accordingly, merely copying images from books, as well as manipulating individual elements of Sigils without understanding, can produce unexpected and unpleasant consequences.
Sigillae and galdrastaves
Sigils: Signatures of Spirits?
Sigils — the Skeletons of Vortices
Transformations and Sealing
Magical Squares as Sigils
Can You Carve? Can You Decipher? Can You Color?
Inscriptions and Images
Coins and Staves
Why do you call proto-Phoenician symbols Enochian? They are quite different.
Moreover, many seals consist of combinations of simple symbols such as cross, oval, rectangle, etc. Are such seals universal? Should it follow from your reasoning about realization symbols that these seals can behave differently, depending on the operator’s affiliation with a particular tradition?
In spirit, the ‘Enochian’ alphabet, in the form in which it is presented by Dr. Dee, is largely a stylized and somewhat modified Middle Eastern alphabet. Or, to be more precise, they originate from a common source, which, however, is not significant in the context of this conversation. And, of course, the Sigils and Seals, besides these symbols, also include a set of other signs – pentagrams and hexagrams, crosses, circles, and generally intersecting lines. Likewise, the Galdrafstaves can be supplemented with non-alphabetic runic signs. The idea is that a specific combination of elementary (letter-based, expressing a simple intersection of a certain flow or vector of Power) and complex (expressing a whole composite idea) symbols forms a certain structure in the Psychocosmos, just as in the Macrocosmos a vortex is formed from its constituent elements. The clearer the correspondence of the elements of the vortex to the elements of the Sign, the fuller the analogy, and, accordingly, the higher the realization power of the Sigil.
Regarding the individual action of the Seals – unlike the Galdrafstaves, interpersonal variations in the use of the Seals concern not so much the direction of their action (as the vortex structure is more stable in relation to small fluctuations than the vector one), as the intensity, effectiveness of that action. In other words, if the same Galdrafstave can have a completely different effect for different people, then the Seal will act approximately the same way, but with varying effectiveness.
Enmerkar, in the post about Enochian magic (https://en.enmerkar.com/myth/dzhon-di-i-magiya-angelov) you write the following: “Another point that supports the stated assumption is the ‘enochian language.’ All goetic spells are composed in human languages, which means languages suitable for describing the human world. ‘Enochian’ Calls, however, are composed in ‘angelic,’ foreign to humans, language, suitable for describing another world, finding a foothold there and external to the operator. That is, unlike traditional goetic evocations, in which the spirit speaks in a language understandable to humans, in the ‘enochian’ ritual, it is the human who speaks in a language understood by the spirit.” You also state that the Enochian language belongs to human language and in particular to proto-Phoenician. Could you clarify this point in more detail?
Isn’t it strange that by increasing awareness we generate a demon within ourselves? After all, the demon must be stronger than all parasites if success is needed.
By developing awareness, a being becomes more ‘attractive’ to predators, as they begin to operate with larger volumes of energy. Therefore, the stronger one is, the more enemies they have.
I do not entirely agree with the applicability of the term ‘Theurgy’ to work with Angels. Theurgy is an invocative interaction with Gods, while Angels, just like Demons for a Magician, are objects of conjuration but not Invocation.
Theurgy is the management of forming forces. In the situation of Hellenistic Egypt, where this term arose, there was no clear understanding that such forces are divided into two groups – free (gods) and servile (angels). So, magical influence on angelic flows can be both theurgical (invocational) and goetic (evocational). However, in practice, evocation and conjuration of angels are much more complex and dangerous than those concerning demons. Therefore, in reality, a large number of ritual schemes are limited precisely to invoking angelic forces, which in its ideology is theurgical.
In this case, if we analyze the most classic and basic of all rituals of the Western Tradition, the ritual that most practitioners of the Western Tradition start with these days – the Lesser Ritual of the Pentagram, where should we place its scheme in the part where it proclaims: ‘Before me – Raphael, etc.’ – as summoning or evocation? I remember you once said that in the LRP, Archangels are indeed conjured by Divine Names. Moreover, the Archangels appear outside the Circle, which is more characteristic of conjuration rather than summoning. In summoning, after all, the entity is invited into the Circle, as if to guests, and ideally, there should be a temporary possession of the Magician’s consciousness by this entity (as in the invocation of Thoth from the Book of Israfel).
Correct. In the LRP, Angels are conjured, but not evoked, as, by the same token, they are not summoned. In this case, there is actually no talk of interacting with the spirits themselves; the operation is carried out with their resolutes.
You spoke of the necessity to prepare a vessel, and that awareness will come by itself. The vessel is the same attractive force; it is also a demon. Am I wrong?
You are mistaken. The vessel is not a demon. A demon is the absolutized desire of the vessel to receive.
What should the work with entities of this kind, such as those entities mentioned in the ‘Arbatel’, be like? For instance, is a Triangle necessary in such work, or do the same rules apply to these entities as in working with Angels? (That is, evocation into a Triangle here is extremely undesirable.)
And what approach should be taken when working with entities of such intermediate character as Geniuses? Once we invoked Iophiel, the Genius of Jupiter. We did not create a Triangle. For contact, we used a sphere placed on the Altar. The visionary received certain visions. According to him, he contacted an entity that figuratively stated that we did not address the proper place. We interpreted its response as meaning that the goals for which we conducted the operation were too materialistic (and indeed they were) for this entity. ‘Where there is Earth – there is no me’ – such was the answer.
Some of my acquaintances used a Triangle (with a medium in it – generally risky) when invoking the Elders of the Earth Tablet (Enochian), corresponding to the Planets. Is the application of the Triangle correct in this case?
Enmerkar, you said that “a demon is an absolutized desire of a vessel to receive.” Does this mean that an angel is an absolutized desire of a vessel to give? And does the interaction of these aspects determine the quality of the vessel itself and its readiness to be filled? And can it be said that, for instance, the free goddess Ishtar is a combination of such binary desires, while Astaroth is an expression of her desire only to receive? Provided that, in general, the goddess can be considered a vessel?
“Angel” and “demon” do not constitute a full binary, I have already written about this. Rather, they are two sides of the same coin. If considered in the current context, an angel is an absolutized desire of a vessel not to lose, which manifests as an obstacle to any flow of power through the boundary of the vessel.
Thank you for the answer. And thank you for sharing Knowledge with those around you. You have an amazing ability to “translate” the complex language of the Universe into simple human terms. What you do is very important.
Enmerkar, what can follow after the removal of the Seal? Is this even possible? Who can remove the seal – only the one who imposed it or not? And what can guide someone who advises to break the Seal?
Proto-Phoenician (Proto-Canaanite) language is the first known example of an ‘inter-world’ way of communication. Even in ancient times, a system of ‘mutual recognition’ of ancient Semitic and ‘inter-world’ writing was formed, and Proto-Canaanite symbols were used to record the ‘Enochian’ language. It is not precisely known whether the inhabitants of the Interspace used the writing of the ancient Semites to record their language or whether the inhabitants of the Middle East ‘peeked’ at the sigillaries and ‘overheard’ the vocals of the Grey spirits, but it is this language that became common (hence the sacralization of later Semitic languages – Aramaic and Hebrew). Throughout the development of civilization, medieval Latin has repeated this path, becoming yet another language of ‘inter-world’ communication.